Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

That isn't my point, Dan. That wasn't a good signal W1AW was putting
out, and it was making a mess out of the local neighborhood. Usually PSK
and OOK Morse get along just fine.

My point is that by coming out with a ratty signal, W1AW was doing what
so many hams were complaining about K1MAN does. Fire it up, and too bad
for the rest of you.

That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first place.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike, Mike, my boy, you just don't understand.

The ARRL is kind of like that "Home on the Range" song... where never
is heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day.

Don't be sayin nuttin bad bout the ARRL, nor their flagship broadcast
station W1AW. You'll get the wrath of the Old Man himself when you
get up to the Pearly Gates.

Someone wrote;
That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first place.
------------------------

From the ARRL License Manual 1976:

CW Bandwidth = wpm X 4
"With proper shaping, the necessary keying bandwidth is equal to 4
times the speed in words per minute for International Morse Code;
e.g. at 25 words per minute, the bandwidth is approximately 100 cycles.
e.g., 40 WPM = approximately 160 Hz"

--
73 From The Wilderness Keyboard

"Keyboard In The Wilderness" wrote in message news:JhiKb.46924$m83.10369@fed1read01...
Someone wrote;
That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first place.
------------------------

From the ARRL License Manual 1976:

CW Bandwidth = wpm X 4
"With proper shaping, the necessary keying bandwidth is equal to 4
times the speed in words per minute for International Morse Code;
e.g. at 25 words per minute, the bandwidth is approximately 100 cycles.
e.g., 40 WPM = approximately 160 Hz"

Does the ARRL License Manual of 1976 address Farnsworth code and bandwidth?

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Keyboard In The Wilderness" wrote in message
news:JhiKb.46924$m83.10369@fed1read01...
Someone wrote;
That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first
place.
------------------------

From the ARRL License Manual 1976:

CW Bandwidth = wpm X 4
"With proper shaping, the necessary keying bandwidth is equal to 4
times the speed in words per minute for International Morse Code;
e.g. at 25 words per minute, the bandwidth is approximately 100 cycles.
e.g., 40 WPM = approximately 160 Hz"

Does the ARRL License Manual of 1976 address Farnsworth code and
bandwidth?

The Farnsworth approach isn't even used for faster code speeds like 40wpm so
it is a moot point. However the calculation method would be to use the
character speed as the parameter in the calculation not the "effective word
speed" that is created by increasing the space between characters.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I suspect that for Farnsworth - just use the character speed - not the
overall speed with extended spacing.

--
73 From The Wilderness Keyboard
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Keyboard In The Wilderness" wrote in message
news:JhiKb.46924$m83.10369@fed1read01...
Someone wrote;
That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first
place.
------------------------

From the ARRL License Manual 1976:

CW Bandwidth = wpm X 4
"With proper shaping, the necessary keying bandwidth is equal to 4
times the speed in words per minute for International Morse Code;
e.g. at 25 words per minute, the bandwidth is approximately 100 cycles.
e.g., 40 WPM = approximately 160 Hz"

Does the ARRL License Manual of 1976 address Farnsworth code and
bandwidth?

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

That isn't my point, Dan. That wasn't a good signal W1AW was putting
out, and it was making a mess out of the local neighborhood. Usually PSK
and OOK Morse get along just fine.

My point is that by coming out with a ratty signal, W1AW was doing what

so many hams were complaining about K1MAN does. Fire it up, and too bad
for the rest of you.

That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first place.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike, Mike, my boy, you just don't understand.

The ARRL is kind of like that "Home on the Range" song... where never
is heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day.

Don't be sayin nuttin bad bout the ARRL, nor their flagship broadcast
station W1AW. You'll get the wrath of the Old Man himself when you
get up to the Pearly Gates.

If any individual hears "bad signals" on W1AW frequency, it is
obviously a fault of the individual's receiver/antenna/ears/imagination.
W1AW and ARRL can do no wrong.

LHA

Brian wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

That isn't my point, Dan. That wasn't a good signal W1AW was putting
out, and it was making a mess out of the local neighborhood. Usually PSK
and OOK Morse get along just fine.

My point is that by coming out with a ratty signal, W1AW was doing what
so many hams were complaining about K1MAN does. Fire it up, and too bad
for the rest of you.

That and wondering what a CW signal Bandwidth was in the first place.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Mike, Mike, my boy, you just don't understand.

The ARRL is kind of like that "Home on the Range" song... where never
is heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day.

Don't be sayin nuttin bad bout the ARRL, nor their flagship broadcast
station W1AW. You'll get the wrath of the Old Man himself when you
get up to the Pearly Gates.

I'll carry a Wouff Hong wit' me for protection!!

- Mike KB3EIA -